11 ms·

> And I can only imagine many people would be happy to mandate a fourth as soon as possible. I'm sorry but I'm not understanding the logic. The booster was rec

> And I can only imagine many people would be happy to mandate a fourth as soon as possible. I'm sorry but I'm not understanding the logic. The booster was recommended after several rounds of research across multiple countries suggested it was a good idea, with Israel doing some of the first testing and reaching the conclusion that it was worthwhile (and it was, by a substantial margin). Their research is now indicating that this is about as far as it goes, which is quite reasonable as most vaccination regimens generally require two or three shots to achieve maximum effect. The subtext of what you're saying is that politicans came to a knee-jerk conclusion that a third shot was necessary and inductively any further shot will so as well. The science does not bear this out, and the third shot was backed by science, not by politicians wanting to do something. Your position sounds like misplaced skepticism.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
timr 5y ago
> I'm sorry but I'm not understanding the logic. The booster was recommended after several rounds of research across multiple countries suggested it was a good idea, with Israel doing some of the first testing and reaching the conclusion that it was worthwhile (and it was, by a substantial margin). You are misinformed. There is a paucity of data supporting boosters, what little exists is for people over 65 (to be fair, the argument in support of boosters seems robust for this group), and the FDA and CDC advisory committees both recommended against boosting of younger populations. They were bypassed. Two long-time FDA scientists resigned over the issue: https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/13/health/boosters-not-needed-lancet-review/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/13/health/boosters-not-needed-la... They wrote a scathing review of the situation in the Lancet: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02046-8/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... Paul Offit (inventor of the Rotavirus vaccine, member of CDC ACIP, and vaccine advocate) is on the record saying that he doesn't advise his own 20-something son to get a booster dose: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2022/01/should-teens-get-booster-omicron/621222/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2022/01/should-te... https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/12/omicron-dr-paul-offit-is-skeptical-of-boosters-for-all.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/12/omicron-dr-paul-offi... The headlong rush toward boosters in all age groups is simply not supported by evidence. (edit: I used the word "mandatory" above; this was a mistake in my own wordering, and I removed it. CDC ACIP recommended that older populations should get a booster, but did not do this for those under 50. I incorrectly summarized this as "recommended against mandatory boosters".)
- kyrra 5y ago
  And many (most?) of these policies ignore natural immunity that people are getting from catching COVID.
  - Daishiman 5y ago
    They do https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciac022/6507165 https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid... .
    - timr 5y ago
      You should probably read the data, and not just the title and conclusions: > Among those previously infected, until the emergence of the Omicron variant, the cumulative incidence of COVID19 was not significantly different between those vaccinated and unvaccinated, even at almost a year of follow-up. > However, among those with prior COVID-19, vaccination was not associated with significantly lower risk of COVID-19 in either the pre-Omicron (HR 0.78, 95% C.I. 0.31-1.96) or the Omicron phase (HR 0.77, 95% C.I. 0.53-1.12). The only thing they find is that there's some effectiveness against symptomatic illness during the Omicron wave: > among those with prior COVID-19, vaccination was associated with significantly lower risk of symptomatic COVID-19 in both the pre-Omicron (HR 0.60, 95% C.I. 0.40-0.90) and the Omicron phase (HR 0.36, 95% C.I. 0.23-0.57). Apparently this is based on the data in Figure 4...but Figure 4 isn't included (again, did you read this??), so I can't say either way.
      - Daishiman 5y ago
        So at the very worst it does nothing. How is that bad? I don't want to go around checking if people had or did not have Covid, which a lot of people are prone to lying about.
        timr 5y ago
        No. At the very worst the vaccine causes harm, and provides no benefit. > I don't want to go around checking if people had or did not have Covid, which a lot of people are prone to lying about. We're not talking about sterilizing immunity. Even the best case arguments for booster doses in the young are citing efficacy against "symptomatic illness" that is well below 100%. Case in point: I just had it. I'm triple vaccinated. I'm not alone.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

timr 5y ago

> I'm sorry but I'm not understanding the logic. The booster was recommended after several rounds of research across multiple countries suggested it was a good idea, with Israel doing some of the first testing and reaching the conclusion that it was worthwhile (and it was, by a substantial margin). You are misinformed. There is a paucity of data supporting boosters, what little exists is for people over 65 (to be fair, the argument in support of boosters seems robust for this group), and the FDA and CDC advisory committees both recommended against boosting of younger populations. They were bypassed. Two long-time FDA scientists resigned over the issue: https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/13/health/boosters-not-needed-lancet-review/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/13/health/boosters-not-needed-la... They wrote a scathing review of the situation in the Lancet: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02046-8/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... Paul Offit (inventor of the Rotavirus vaccine, member of CDC ACIP, and vaccine advocate) is on the record saying that he doesn't advise his own 20-something son to get a booster dose: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2022/01/should-teens-get-booster-omicron/621222/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2022/01/should-te... https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/12/omicron-dr-paul-offit-is-skeptical-of-boosters-for-all.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/12/omicron-dr-paul-offi... The headlong rush toward boosters in all age groups is simply not supported by evidence. (edit: I used the word "mandatory" above; this was a mistake in my own wordering, and I removed it. CDC ACIP recommended that older populations should get a booster, but did not do this for those under 50. I incorrectly summarized this as "recommended against mandatory boosters".)

kyrra 5y ago
And many (most?) of these policies ignore natural immunity that people are getting from catching COVID.
- Daishiman 5y ago
  They do https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciac022/6507165 https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid... .
  - timr 5y ago
    You should probably read the data, and not just the title and conclusions: > Among those previously infected, until the emergence of the Omicron variant, the cumulative incidence of COVID19 was not significantly different between those vaccinated and unvaccinated, even at almost a year of follow-up. > However, among those with prior COVID-19, vaccination was not associated with significantly lower risk of COVID-19 in either the pre-Omicron (HR 0.78, 95% C.I. 0.31-1.96) or the Omicron phase (HR 0.77, 95% C.I. 0.53-1.12). The only thing they find is that there's some effectiveness against symptomatic illness during the Omicron wave: > among those with prior COVID-19, vaccination was associated with significantly lower risk of symptomatic COVID-19 in both the pre-Omicron (HR 0.60, 95% C.I. 0.40-0.90) and the Omicron phase (HR 0.36, 95% C.I. 0.23-0.57). Apparently this is based on the data in Figure 4...but Figure 4 isn't included (again, did you read this??), so I can't say either way.
    - Daishiman 5y ago
      So at the very worst it does nothing. How is that bad? I don't want to go around checking if people had or did not have Covid, which a lot of people are prone to lying about.
      - timr 5y ago
        No. At the very worst the vaccine causes harm, and provides no benefit. > I don't want to go around checking if people had or did not have Covid, which a lot of people are prone to lying about. We're not talking about sterilizing immunity. Even the best case arguments for booster doses in the young are citing efficacy against "symptomatic illness" that is well below 100%. Case in point: I just had it. I'm triple vaccinated. I'm not alone.